[e2e] Are Packet Trains / Packet Bursts a Problem in TCP?

Lachlan Andrew lachlan.andrew at gmail.com
Sat Sep 30 14:42:37 PDT 2006

Greetings Detlef,

On 29/09/06, Detlef Bosau <detlef.bosau at web.de> wrote:
> I haven´t read all the relevant papers yet, but hasn´t been there some
> rumour that these LRD need at least a minimum buffer size on the
> routers? In other words: If we take care not to configure buffers too
> large, would this cure the problem?

What do you mean by "need"?  It is well known that LRD needs large
buffers in the sense that avoiding heavy loss with LRD traffic needs
large buffers.  I have never heard that LRD needs large buffers, in
the sense that eliminating buffers eliminates LRD.  May the rumours
that you mention be refering to the first of these?

Long-range dependence is a long-timescale phenomenon, and buffering
primarily only affects short-timescale phenomena.  Its interaction
with flow control could in principle affect long-timescale phenomena,
but lowering the buffer size would slow Reno down and thus increase
(not decrease) the "long range"-ness of the dependence.


Lachlan Andrew  Dept of Computer Science, Caltech
1200 E California Blvd, Mail Code 256-80, Pasadena CA 91125, USA
Phone: +1 (626) 395-8820    Fax: +1 (626) 568-3603

More information about the end2end-interest mailing list